Likewise, the loss of both ears does not affect his qualification, because they do not affect judgment or action and can be concealed beneath a discreet covering so that they are not visible. As for the loss of both hands, which prevents him from working, and the loss of both legs, which deprives him of physical strength, these prevent both the initial conclusion of the imamate contract and its continuation, since he is incapable of fulfilling the rights of the community required of him, whether through action or movement.

The loss of one hand or one leg, however, prevents the valid conclusion of the imamate contract, because he is incapable of exercising authority fully. But if this occurs after he has assumed the imamate, it does not require his removal, because complete soundness is required for the conclusion of the contract, whereas complete incapacity is required for removal from office.

If his nose is mutilated or one of his eyes is destroyed, this does not affect either his initial appointment or his continuation in office, because it does not affect the rights he must discharge. It has also been said that this prevents the conclusion of the imamate contract but not continuation in office, because it is a defect that diminishes his standing; and when standing is diminished, obedience is diminished as well. This, however, entails a deficiency in governance.

If one of his aides confines and overpowers him, independently taking charge of executing affairs without openly displaying disobedience or publicly declaring opposition, this does not prevent him from remaining imam or impair the validity of his authority. His actions must then be examined. If they conform to the rulings of religion and the requirements of justice, it is permissible to leave him in control of them, so that those matters may be carried out and their rulings enforced, lest religious contracts whose suspension would bring corruption upon the community be brought to a halt. But if his actions fall outside the rulings of religion and the requirements of justice, it is not permissible to leave him in control of them, and the imam must seek the support of someone who will restrain his hand and remove his usurpation.

If he is captured by a hostile enemy from whom he is unable to free himself, this prevents the conclusion of the imamate contract for him, because he is incapable of managing the affairs of the Muslims—regardless of whether the enemy is a rebellious Muslim or an unbeliever.

The Muslim community has the latitude to choose another capable person in his place. In a report transmitted by Abu al-Harith, Ahmad indicated that this invalidates the imamate. He was asked about an imam against whom a claimant to rule had risen, causing the people to fall into discord, with some supporting one and some supporting the other: “With whom should the Friday prayer be held?” He replied, “With the one who prevails.” The apparent meaning of this is that if the second contender subdues and overcomes the first, the first’s imamate comes to an end, since he said, “The Friday prayer is with the one who prevails,” thereby making dominance the criterion.

Another report from him indicates that the imam remains in office. In the report of al-Marwazi, he was asked: “What is the evidence that the Friday prayer remains obligatory during civil strife?” He replied, “That Uthman ordered them to pray.” He was told, “They say that Uthman ordered this.” He replied, “They only asked him after they had already prayed.” The apparent meaning of this is that Uthman was not considered removed from the imamate despite being overpowered, since Ahmad took his permission into account.

If he is captured after the imamate has been conferred upon him, it is obligatory to rescue him, because the imamate entails the obligation to support him. He remains imam so long as his release is hoped for and his liberation is anticipated, whether through fighting or ransom. If hope of his release is abandoned, the identity of his captor must be considered. If the captor is among the polytheists, he is removed from the imamate, and those qualified to choose must renew the pledge of allegiance to someone else.

If he designates a successor to the imamate while captive, the matter must be examined. If this occurs after hope of his release has been abandoned, his designation is invalid, since his imamate no longer remains. The imamate of his designated successor becomes established once hope of his release has been abandoned, because his imamate has ceased. If he is freed from captivity thereafter